Since I am not an ecologist, when I teach the ecology lecture I 'go by the book' and trust that the textbook will be reasonably accurate. But now, perhaps I should rethink the way I teach about ecological succession...What do my ecological readers think?
Search this blog
Profile
I am the Online Community Manager at PLoS ONE. My scientific specialty is chronobiology (circadian rhythms and photoperiodism), with additional interests in comparative physiology, animal behavior and evolution. I am not an MD so I cannot diagnose and treat your sleep problems. This is a personal blog and opinions within in no way reflect the policies of PLoS ONE. You can contact me at: Coturnix@gmail.com
Join us at ScienceOnline'09
Buy the 2007 Science Blogging Anthology:
Buy the 2006 Science Blogging Anthology:
Recent Posts
- Clock Quotes
- The Open Laboratory 2008 - all the submissions fit to print
- Today's carnivals
- ScienceOnline'09 on the Radio!
- Plant a Seed in every classroom
- New and Exciting in PLoS this week
- My picks from ScienceDaily
- Recuerdos de la Alhambra
- Today's carnivals
- Clock Quotes
Recent Comments
- John Dupuis on Plant a Seed in every classroom
- Scott Leslie on If you share something, is it useful and educational?
- Sandra Porter on 2008 Edublog Awards - time to start nominations
- Danica on Why does Impact Factor persist most strongly in smaller countries
- Mike Haubrich, FCD on What's wrong with Google Blogsearch?
- Coturnix on The summary of the Science Blogging Meme
- Stuart on The summary of the Science Blogging Meme
- Mimi on The summary of the Science Blogging Meme
- Bjoern Brembs on Why does Impact Factor persist most strongly in smaller countries
- Colugo on Twilight
Archives
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
Blogroll
Subscribe via Email
Stay abreast of your favorite bloggers' latest and greatest via e-mail, via a daily digest.
My Old Stuff
Make Me Happy
Add Scienceblogs to your Technorati Favorites!
Make Me Solvent
I Support
Bloggie Stuff
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
« ClockQuotes | Main | My picks from ScienceDaily »
Ecological succession: scientific theories succeeding each other?
Category: Ecology
Posted on: April 14, 2008 5:08 AM, by Coturnix
Find more posts in: 
Life Science
Environment
Comments
Well, this has sort of thing has really been known for decades. Indeed in the early 20th century, Clements was competing with Gleason, who argued for a more random view of things. The Gleasonian view has been in vogue for years now.
Posted by: SteveF | April 14, 2008 7:30 AM
I agree with Steve. Also, most ecologists recognize stochastic processes like recruitment in thinking about succession. I'm biased towards the marine world, but I think you might find salt marsh and rocky intertidal succession useful examples for class. There's a lot of discussion on how different forces, such as competition, facilitation, and physical stress, interact to influence successional patterns. This book is a good reference.
Posted by: Miriam | April 14, 2008 1:50 PM